Summary
Summary A Level Psychology Paper 1 A* 16 marker essay plans
Concise A* 16 marker essay plans for all A Level Psychology paper 1 specification points
[Show more]
Content preview
Social influenceOutline and evaluate Milgram’s (1963) research investigating obedience to authority. (16 marks)
A01
- Milgram investigated whether people would obey an unjust order from an authority figure to inflict pain and injure
an innocent person
- He used a sample of 40 male American volunteers as participants
- He conducted the experiment at Yale University, and participants were instructed to administer an electric shock of
increasing strength to the ‘learner’ every time there was a mistake when recalling a list of word pairs
- When participants refused to continue, the experimenter responded with a series of verbal prods, eg. “The
experiment requires that you continue.”
- 100% of participants went to at least 300 volts, and 65% of participants continued to the full 450 volts
- Found that people will obey unjust orders from someone perceived to be a legitimate authority figure
- Participants showed signs of distress and tension eg. sweating, stuttering and trembling
A03
- Broke several ethical guidelines
- He deceived participants as they believed that it was a study on how punishment affects learning, rather
than obedience
- They were also deceived by the rigging of the role allocation that was in fact pre-determined
- Milgram did not protect participants from psychological harm, as many showed real signs of distress
during the experiment, and may have continued to feel guilty afterwards, knowing that they could have
harmed someone else
- Moreover, although participants in Milgram’s study did have a right to withdraw, as they were told
before the study that they could leave anytime. However, due to the nature of the verbal pods given by
the experimenter, participants may have been pressured into continuing, as they did not think that they
had the right to withdraw
- These breeches could damage the reputation of psychology and jeopardise future research
- Lacks ecological validity
- Conducted a laboratory study, very different from real-life situations of obedience
- In everyday life, we obey far more harmless instructions, rather than giving electric shocks
- Thus unable to generalise his findings to real-life situations of obedience and cannot conclude that
people would obey less severe instructions to the same degree
- However, Hofling et al. found that nurses were obedient to unjustified instructions from a doctor in a
hospital setting, so Milgram’s experiment may actually reflect wider authority relationships in real-life
situations
- Lacks population validity - beta bias - androcentric
- Used a biased sample of 40 male American volunteers from a broadly individualistic society
- Unable to generalise results to other populations, particularly collectivist cultures or female populations,
since it cannot be concluded that those in other cultures or female participants would respond in a similar
way
- Low internal validity - social desirability bias
- Some believe that many went to higher voltages because they did not believe the shocks were real and
were not fooled by the experimental set-up
- A recent review of the original tape recordings reported that many participants vocalised doubts about
the genuine nature of the electric shocks
- Participants may have only been going along with the experiment due to social desirability bias, but may
not have truly believed it, thus lowering the internal validity - not testing what he intended to investigate
,Outline and evaluate the explanations for obedience. (16 marks)
A01
- Agentic shift
- When an individual carries out orders of an authority figure and acts as their ‘agent’, with little personal
responsibility
- The shift in responsibility reduced moral strain for their actions
- Eg. in Milgram’s experiment, 65% of participants administered the full 450 volts as they were said to be
in an agentic state
- Legitimacy of authority
- When a person recognises their own and other’s positions in a social hierarchy
- Leading to recognition of the authority figure’s right to issue a demand
- Legitimacy is increased by visible symbols of authority, eg uniform
- Legitimacy of setting, order, system
- Eg. When Milgram’s experiment took place at the prestigious Yale University, 65% of participants
administered the full 450 volts. When it was replicated in a rundown building in Bridgeport, obedience
levels dropped to 47.5%. The change in location reduced the legitimacy of the authority, as participants
were less likely to trust the experimenter, and the power of the authority figure was diminished
A03
- Cultural differences
- Differences in the degree to which authority figures are seen and accepted as legitimate in some cultures
- Eg. Kilman and Mann replicated Milgram’s experiment in Australia, and only 16% of participants
administered the full 450 volts, whereas Mantell found that 85% did so when conducted in Germany.
- This cross-cultural comparison shows that different societies follow alternative hierarchical structures,
and children may be socialised differently from a young age to be more, or less, obedient towards
legitimate figure within that specific culture
- Thus, Milgram’s results may not be generalisable across all cultures and societies with different beliefs
and values
- High reliability
- Used a methodological approach through systematically changing one variable at a time
- High control over variations, possible to closely monitor the effect of each on obedience rates
- All procedures followed standardised methods, variables being kept as consistent as possible
- In total, over 1000 participants took part across all studies
- Supporting evidence - Hofling
- It was found that 21 out of 22 nurses obeyed a doctor’s orders over the phone and would administer an
overdose of an unauthorised medication, all of which is against hospital protocol. Only one nurse
questioned the identity of the researcher (“Dr Smith”) and why he was on the ward.
- This demonstrated that people rarely question supposed ‘authority’, even when there may be good reason
to do so. It showed how social pressure brought about by the imbalance of power could lead to a nurse
actually putting a patient at risk and further serious consequences.
- Obedience may be dispositional, not situational
- May be due to individual differences such as the authoritarian personality, where someone is extremely
obedient, and has unquestioning respect and submission to authority figures.
- Whilst someone in a prestigious environment may obey, it may also be because of their dispositional
personality, and proximity and uniform may only be important when one has an authoritarian personality,
as is not simply situational variables alone.
- Preventing blind obedience
- It is useful to be aware of the reasons for obedience to help prevent blind obedience, which can lead to
atrocities and wars in society if those unconditionally obey and follow commands of an authority figure
without question.
- Learning about the mechanism of obedience can allow us to question motives and requests from
authority figures, and ensure that they align with our personal beliefs before we blindly obey and
perform unreasonable orders.
, Discuss situational variables affecting obedience. (16 marks)
A01 (PUL)
- Proximity
- The extent to which you are physically close to someone or something, in this case the experimenter or
the learner
- Milgram conducted a variation where the teacher and learner were in the same room - obedience
levels fell, with only 40% administering the full 450 volts - teacher was able to understand the learner’s
pain more directly as a consequence of their doing and decision to administer the shock
- When the experimenter gave instructions over the telephone, obedience levels fell to 20.5% - feel less
pressured to obey authority figures without their immediate presence as they are not seen as legitimate
- Uniform
- When the experimenter wore a white lab coat, indicating his status as a university professor or scientist
who is knowledgeable, obedience rates were 65%
- When another ‘participate’ in normal everyday clothes pretending to be an ordinary member of the
public was the experimenter, obedience levels dropped to 20% - demonstrating the dramatic power of
uniform on levels of obedience
- Location
- When conducted in a laboratory at Yale University, obedience rates were 65% as it is a credible setting
- When conducted in a rundown office building in Bridgeport, Connecticut, obedience levels dropped to
47.5% - highlights how location creates a prestigious atmosphere, generating respect and submission -
the belief that professionals know what they are doing
A03
- Cultural differences
- Differences in the degree to which authority figures are seen and accepted as legitimate in some cultures
- Eg. Kilman and Mann replicated Milgram’s experiment in Australia, and only 16% of participants
administered the full 450 volts, whereas Mantell found that 85% did so when conducted in Germany.
- This cross-cultural comparison shows that different societies follow alternative hierarchical
structures, and children may be socialised differently from a young age to be more, or less, obedient
towards legitimate figure within that specific culture
- Thus, Milgram’s results may not be generalisable across all cultures and societies with different beliefs
and values
- High reliability
- Used a methodological approach through systematically changing one variable at a time
- High control over variations, possible to closely monitor the effect of each on obedience rates
- All procedures followed standardised methods, variables being kept as consistent as possible
- In total, over 1000 participants took part across all studies
- More data, more support for hypothesis, better reliability
- Obedience may be dispositional, not situational
- May be due to individual differences such as the authoritarian personality, where someone is extremely
obedient, and has unquestioning respect and submission to authority figures
- Whilst someone in a prestigious environment may obey, it may also be because of their dispositional
personality, and proximity and uniform may only be important when one has an authoritarian personality,
as is not simply situational variables alone.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller alevelstudy. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £8.89. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
77851 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now